Where did 607 come from?

Whenever these threads develop and scholar is involved, I can't help picturing him sitting at his keyboard, typing away saying "If i just ignore what they say and type this, watch them get all excited. I can just do this over and over and they will respond everytime." I'm not saying I don't appreciate the many posts by those in the know on this subject, it doesn't take long in these discussions for anyone other than those with JW blinders firmly attached to see the real issues.

I really think you do more harm than good Mr. Scholar if your goal is really to prove the WT is right. Those with enough interest to actually look into what is being said can see that your arguments don't hold water. OTOH, if you expounded your arguments at the local KH, there would be little or no interest. I guess from that viewpoint if you truly are interested in this subject, it would make sense to come to a place like this where you could actually carry on a discussion about it.

Very well explained OnTheWayOut, and a good assessment of Russell's character. Thanks too to all the other posters, this is aquestion that I never had the exact answer to when posed by a M.S visiting me to get me back in the JW's, not that he would have accepted this, or seen it as relevant, he is of the school that says "look at what we are doing now, not at what we taught in the past" Ho Hum.

I wonder if Russell ever consulted Bible Dictionaries and such, all of the contempory ones that he would have had acces to that I have seen put the destruction of Jerusalem as 588-586 BCE.

If Russell did ever read other authorities, he must have had the incredible arrogance to believe that he knew better than all of them, an arrogance, verging on stupidity, that pervades the WT thought and teaching to this day.

Might as well add my tiny smattering of WTS history to this - Br Miller figured 677 BC was the date to start the 2520 years from because of the Jews being conquered by Esarhaddon, and the taking of Manasseh captive to Babylon - so he arrived at his speculation of 1843 for Christ's return. Then when that proved disappointing they moved the dates to 676 BC - 1844 AD. That date didn't work out either. Then some more Bible speculators came around (I'm also guilty of falling into this category but it's fun) and they figured the 1844 date was wrong because it represented a "double" for Christ's birth, and the real date should have been 30 years later - 1874.75 as that would represent his time of baptism. And 3 and 1/2 years later would represent his sacrifice - 1878.25 - and of course that was also used as proof of the elevated stand of the WT foundation - the beginning of its publication being germinated on May 29th expose of Barbour's mistaken views about significance of ransom sacrifice that Russell published in the Congregationalist News. This just happened to coincide with the day of Pentecost for that year I guess so this was supposed to be as significant as Peter's announcement a couple thousand years earlier - not quite right obviously but it worked to substantiate their own elevated views of what they thought they were about. Then they carried it a bit further and added 3 1/2 more years on top of that date to signify the end of the heavenly calling - 1881 as I remember as being a "double" for the time of Cornelius - the first Gentile convert to be called. And they went a bit further and added 37 years to the 1877/78 date and reached 1914/1915 era as representing the "double" for destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD (37 years after Christ's death). So they were convinced that the Great Day of Jehovah's Judgement would be in 1914. When I use the terms double here I am not referring to the old traditional Israel's double concept though that is what got this idea ringing in their craniums I suspect.

The other fun part of the 1874 date for Russell was that he calculated this was the end of the 6,000 years and the beginning of the 7th Day since he started time in 4126. 6,000 minus 4126 gives you 1874 in the old fashioned days of straight out arithmetic (not messing with the zero year at that time). So Russell was "doubly" (pun intended) convinced he had it right. Two important indicators, both wrong unfortunately. Russell wasn't the only one thinking the 6,000 years ended around that time because that famous Mason (can't draw out his name for the life of me right now but he wrote Dogma and Morals) also felt 1870 was the date - he started the time in 4130 - and Russell was an ardent Mason at that time - so aware of this also. This was the Mason's reason for publishing Dogma and Morals at that time.

To continue on the old Israel Double concept which should probably be a different thread was part of the basis for believing 1918 would be the time for Jehovah's approval or selection of his channel or organization - the faithful slave as it would double the birthdate of Isaac (wrong again of course) - and here comes another really hilarious one but it was a third proof for Russell for his erroneous convictions - If the double for Isaac's birth was 1918/1919 then 40 years subtracted from that would double his age 40 because everything done in reverse in the double concept like a mirror - and this would be the date Isaac was figuratively sacrificed which pictured Christ's sacrifice so 1878/1879 just HAD to be the date chosen by God for the start of the WT publication. Sad part of all this is Isaac was more likely sacrificed in a figurative way at age 37 than age 40 but oh well - details, details - what's a few years one way or another. LOL. And then of course the double for Isaac's birth doesn't really work out to be 1918 at all because they didn't even have their chronology straight. Errors on top of errors in this field. Like a minefield to even walk through it these days.

Back to the 607 thing - the Jewish people today actually believe in the 2520 day concept and figure their period from 604/603 to 1917 - adding in the zero year. They think Nebuchadnezzar marched thru Jerusalem in 604 BC taking some of the noble youth off to Babylon at that time together with some of the valuables from the Temple. And they believe this establishes the capture of Jerusalem via General Allenby in 1917 as "divinely ordained" - so even the Jewish nation plays with this one! Who am I to pass judgement on these things but they are fascinating to me.

Oh - and something more I forgot to add here - another reason for Russell to come up with 1874 - he figured - the figuring actually borrowed from others - that the beginning of Daniel's 1260 days was 539 AD - double for 539 BC end of Babylon and 539 AD became the beginning of a new Babylon - just the reverse - he linked the Papacy with the idea of Babylon the Great - the whore of Revelation prophecy - when the Papacy took over temporal rulership of Kings - haven't locked down the history on that one since it seemed so outlandish to me I never bothered - but he had some basis - something to do with the Ostrogoths as I remember - and thus in 1799 - 1260 years later with the abolishment of the Pope by Napoleon fulfilled their idea of casting Babylon the Great down. Then add 30 more years for the 1290 days and we get to 1829 - thought to be about the start of Br Miller's work proclaiming the end in 1843/1844 - and then add in another 45 days one arrives at the 1335 days being completed in 1874 right in time for Russell's grand insight and the roving about making the true knowledge abundant.

I would say his ideas of the 1335 days actually better than the current Daniel Book of the WTS handles them - all grand speculations - and that is the trouble one gets into speculating I remind myself. But for Russell this was one more thread of conviction for him that 1874 the great beginning of Jehovah's 7th Day. Recommend reading Carl Olof Jonnson's book on End of Gentile Times - he does ever so much better a job of handling these historical developments tho he ends up being a Preterist and I can't go that route myself.

scholar hey you cut the crap where in the BIBLE you know the book that you claim to love. show me all the scriptures aside from wts comments leading me there if it is that true it should hit me in the face show me your chronology from the good book! dude! and quit talking in circles